Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/24/2014 Public hearing transcript re BILL#2551 PUBLIC HEARING SEPTEMBER 24, 2014 A public hearing of the Council of the County of Kaua`i was called to order by Ross Kagawa, Vice Chair, Environmental Services / Public Safety / Community Assistance Committee, on Wednesday, September 24, 2014, at 2:06 p.m., at the Council Chambers, 4396 Rice Street, Suite 201, Historic County Building, Lihu`e, and the presence of the following was noted: Honorable Tim Bynum Honorable Mason K. Chock, Sr. Honorable Gary L. Hooser Honorable Ross Kagawa Honorable JoAnn A. Yukimura Honorable Jay Furfaro (present at 2:07p.m.) Not Present: Honorable Mel Rapozo The Clerk read the notice of the public hearing on the following: "Bill No. 2551 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 21, SECTIONS 21-1.3 AND 21-9.1, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO INTEGRATED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TO ESTABLISH VARIABLE RATES FOR THE COLLECTION OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL REFUSE (PAY AS YOU THROW)," which was passed on first reading and ordered to print by the Council of the County of Kaua`i on August 27, 2014, and published in The Garden Island newspaper on September 5, 2014. (Council Chair Furfaro was noted as present.) Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Are there any registered speakers? Mr. Sato: We currently have no registered speakers, but received one (1) written testimony. The following communication was received for the record: 1. Imparato, Carl, dated September 19, 2014 The hearing proceeded as follows: Mr. Kagawa: Thank you. Is there anybody from the public who wishes to speak on Pay As You Throw? Please step up. You may start by introducing your name, and you may begin. PUBLIC HEARING 2 SEPTEMBER 24, 2014 BILL NO. 2551 PAT GEGEN: Thank you, Chair Kagawa. Good afternoon Council. My name is Pat Gegen for the record. I do support the Bill, Pay As You Throw, Bill No. 2551. I do appreciate that fact that they talk about it being variable rates because ultimately, this is not truly pay as you throw. We are not covering the costs that are associated with the services we are providing. So, it is really looking at a variable rate, is what it is looking at based on the amount of rubbish that you put at the curb, and you decide to get rid of. Going back a little bit, yesterday I had the pleasure of being on the Zero Waste panel for the Maui County Council because Councilmember Victorino has introduced a Zero Waste Resolution very similar to the Kaua`i Zero Waste Resolution that was passed here in 2011. I bring this up mainly to let you know that while Allison Fraley was there and talked about many of the good things that are going on in this County that helps bring us towards that direction of zero waste, they were very impressed that we were looking at a pay as you throw type of Ordinance. They have a lot of the very similar concerns that we do here regarding the amount of money that is going out and the different programs. They actually cut services a couple weeks ago on some of the rubbish, which created quite an uproar in the community, to say the least. So, they found out it was a very important service that they are providing. While you contemplate this, this variable rate or Pay As You Throw Ordinance/Bill, what I would like to you to do is really think about why are you looking at implementing this. Why is the Administration implementing this? I would argue that the reason it is trying to be implemented is to look at our behaviors and trying to help us make better decisions. For many years, we have had the ability to voluntarily do our recycling, that type of thing, but remember, just three (3) or four (4) years ago, you could put ten (10), twelve (12), or fifteen (15) garbage cans at the curb, and they would be taken away. All of a sudden, we introduce the automated service with the ninety-six (96) gallon can, and people start becoming aware of the fact that what they are doing, throwing things away, actually has a cost as well as a price to them. So, what happened? If you take a look at our statistics, guess what? Our recycling figures have slowly crept up through voluntarily doing it. You still have not passed any Ordinances that require recycling or keeping green waste out of the rubbish or anything like that, but guess what? People have been able to deal with the ninety-six (96) gallon can, and have slowly increased their recycling. Now, many would argue that the ninety-six (96) gallon can is still too big. We still have too many recyclables going into the rubbish and ending up in the landfill. I would agree with this. By doing a variable rate and actually rewarding people who put less rubbish out at the end of the curb to magically disappear, which we know it does not. It goes to our landfill, which is very expensive, and try to promote less waste being generated and more people recycling, I think, is a very admirable and desirable state to be in. The recycling has been there. Mr. Sato: Three (3) minutes. Mr. Kagawa: That is your first three (3) minutes. You have another three (3). Mr. Gegen: Thank you very much. Voluntarily, it is going well, but you know what? I think we need to increase people's awareness, and whether that is doubling the price of the ninety-six (96) gallon can, adjusting the price down for the sixty-four (64) gallon can as we roll forward and increase the price of the ninety-six (96). What we need to do is we need to reward those PUBLIC HEARING 3 SEPTEMBER 24, 2014 BILL NO. 2551 behaviors we are looking for, which in this case is creating less trash and filling up our landfill less, and we need to disincentives those behaviors that we do not want. Now think about it. I know there is a lot of debate and a lot of discussion about additional fees going on here. We are still not paying the actual cost of running the landfill, and while you contemplate this and look at it, what is going to be easier for your constituents to really swallow? A small fee increase if they choose to continue behaviors as usual and not change, not recycle, or reuse more, or are they more looking forward to paying for expansion of the existing landfill to the sum of tens of hundreds of millions of dollars? Which is going to be easier? I think the small increase on a monthly basis that says, "Hey, if you want a cheaper fee, do not waste as much, recycle a little bit more, change your behavior, and pay attention to what you are doing," is a much better idea. Just one (1) quick clarification too. I am here as Chair of Zero Waste, and zero waste, as most of you know, does not mean we are not going to have absolutely zero waste. That is not realistic in the way that we operate today. What Zero Waste does is it tries to take us down the path to minimize the wasteful habits that we have, which includes consuming things that are less wasteful, purchasing only those things that we need, and not buying happy meals that have a toy that gets thrown away ten (10) seconds later. Think about the habits that we are doing, and that is what Zero Waste's goal really is, as well as trying to make sure that those resources that have a future potential are not being burned or incinerated and can no longer be used. That is truly wasting the resources we get from our Mother Earth. So, with that, I thank you. Mr. Kagawa: Thank you for your testimony, Pat. Mr. Gegen: Thank you. Ms. Yukimura: Question. Mr. Kagawa: Clarifying question? Please keep it to clarifying questions. Ms. Yukimura: Yes. So, when you say you represent Zero Waste, you actually mean you represent Zero Waste Kauai? It is a group? Mr. Gegen: That is correct. I am the Chair of Zero Waste Kauai and our various members. Ms. Yukimura: Okay, and this practice of pay as you throw, is it not a best practice across the Country? Mr. Gegen: It definitely is a best practice. If I may, when I was living on the mainland, we paid the actual cost of our disposal, and guess what? Mr. Furfaro: Excuse me, point of order, Mr. Chair. Mr. Kagawa: Yes, what is the point of order? PUBLIC HEARING 4 SEPTEMBER 24, 2014 BILL NO. 2551 Mr. Furfaro: The Councilmember may ask a question, which does not broaden the testimony already given to the six (6) minutes to the speaker. Mr. Gegen: I apologize. Mr. Furfaro: I just want to make sure we understand the rules. The Councilmember may ask you additional questions, but you cannot expand on your initial testimony. Mr. Gegen: Thank you. So, just to be clear, yes, it is considered a best practice and I will be forwarding an article from a solid waste magazine that states such. Ms. Yukimura: One (1) last question. Mr. Kagawa: Go ahead. Ms. Yukimura: Does the evidence not show that education alone is much less effective than education plus incentives? Mr. Gegen: Yes, it does. From a behavioral psychology and a social psychology standpoint, unless you have incentives attached with it or disincentives, the behaviors changes are relatively minimal. Ms. Yukimura: Thank you. Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Pat. Mr. Gegen: Thank you. Mr. Kagawa: More clarifying questions? Chair. Mr. Furfaro: Yes. I want to make sure the speaker realizes that this will then go to a Committee of which these discussions can be broader. Today is just to receive testimony. Mr. Gegen: Understood. Thank you, Chair. Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Pat. Mr. Gegen: Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING 5 SEPTEMBER 24, 2014 BILL NO. 2551 Mr. Kagawa: Anybody else wishing to speak on Pay As You Throw? There being no further testimony on this matter, the public hearing adjourned at 2:14 p.m. Respectfully submitted, VU) IV* SCOTT K. SA 0 Council Services Review Officer :aa